Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott, Bart.
Walter Scott to George Ellis, 2 November 1808
“Ashestiel, Nov. 2d, 1808.
“We had, equally to our joy and surprise, a flying
visit from Heber, about three weeks ago.
He staid but three days but, between old stories and new, we made them very
merry in their passage. During his stay, John
Murray, the bookseller in Fleet Street, who has more real
knowledge of what concerns his business than any of his brethren—at least than
any of them that I know—came to canvass a most important plan, of which I am
now, in ‘dern privacie,’ to give you the outline. I had most
strongly recommended to our Lord Advocate† to think of some counter
measures against the Edinburgh
Review, which, politically speaking, is doing incalculable damage. I
do not mean this in a mere party view;—the present ministry are not all that I
could wish them—for (Canning excepted) I
doubt there is among them too much self-seeking, as it
was called in Cromwell’s’
time; and what is their misfortune, if not their fault, there is not among them
one in the decided situation of
* When the 26th Number appeared, Mr Scott wrote to Constable in these terms:
“The Edinburgh
Review had become such as to render it impossible for me
to continue a contributor to it.—Now, it is
such as I can no longer continue to receive or read it.”
The list of the then subscribers exhibits in an indignant dash of
Constable’s pen opposite Mr
Scott’s name, the word “Stopt!!!”’—Letter from Mr R. Cadell. † The Right Hon.
John Campbell Colquhoun, husband of “Scott’s
early friend, Mary Anne Erskine.
|
| THE EDINBURGH REVIEW, ETC.—1808. | 203 |
paramount authority,
both with respect to the others and to the Crown, which is, I think, necessary,
at least in difficult times, to produce promptitude, regularity, and efficiency
in measures of importance. But their political principles are sound English
principles, and, compared to the greedy and inefficient horde which preceded
them, they are angels of light and of purity. It is obvious, however, that they
want defenders both in and out of doors. Pitt’s
—‘Love and fear glued many friends to him; And now he’s fallen, those tough commixtures melt.’
|
Were this only to effect a change of hands, I should expect it with more
indifference; but I fear a change of principles is designed. The Edinburgh Review tells you coolly, ‘We foresee
a speedy revolution in this country as well as Mr Cobbett;’ and, to say the truth, by degrading
the person of the Sovereign—exalting the power of the French armies, and the
wisdom of their counsels—holding forth that peace (which they allow can only be
purchased by the humiliating prostration of our honour) is indispensable to the
very existence of this country—I think, that for these two years past, they
have done their utmost to hasten the accomplishment of their own prophecy. Of
this work 9000 copies are printed quarterly, and no genteel family can pretend
to be without it, because, independent of its politics, it gives the only
valuable literary criticism which can be met with. Consider, of the numbers who
read this work, how many are there likely to separate the literature from the
politics—how many youths are there upon whose minds the flashy and bold
character of the work is likely to make an indelible impression; and think what
the consequence is likely to be.
“Now, I think there is balm in Gilead for all this;
and
204 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
that the cure lies in instituting such a Review in London as should be
conducted totally independent of bookselling influence, on a plan as liberal as
that of the Edinburgh, its
literature as well supported, and its principles English and constitutional.
Accordingly, I have been given to understand that Mr William Gifford is willing to become the conductor of such a
work, and I have written to him, at the Lord Advocate’s desire, a very
voluminous letter on the subject. Now, should this plan succeed, you must hang
your birding-piece on its hooks, take down your old Anti-jacobin armour, and
‘remember your swashing blow.’ It is not that I think
this projected Review ought to be exclusively or principally political—this
would, in my opinion, absolutely counteract its purpose, which I think should
be to offer to those who love their country, and to those whom we would wish to
love it, a periodical work of criticism conducted with equal talent, but upon
sounder principle than that which has gained so high a station in the world of
letters. Is not this very possible? In point of learning, you Englishmen have
ten times our scholarship; and as for talent and genius, ‘Are not
Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than any of the rivers in
Israel?’ Have we not yourself and your cousin, the Roses, Malthus, Matthias,
Gifford, Heber,
and his brother? Can I not procure you a
score of blue-caps who would rather write for us than for the Edinburgh Review if they got as much pay by it?
‘A good plot, good friends, and full of expectation—an excellent
plot, excellent friends!’
“Heber’s
fear was, lest we should fail in procuring regular steady contributors; but I
know so much of the interior discipline of reviewing, as to have no
apprehension of that. Provided we are once set a-going by a few dashing
numbers, there would be no fear of enlisting regular contributors; but the
amateurs must bestir them-
| THE QUARTERLY REVIEW PROJECTED—1808. | 205 |
selves in the first instance.
From Government we should be entitled to expect confidential communication as
to points of fact (so far as fit to be made public), in our political
disquisitions. With this advantage, our good cause and St George to boot, we may at least divide the field with our
formidable competitors, who, after all, are much better at cutting than
parrying, and whom uninterrupted triumph has as much unfitted for resisting a
serious attack, as it has done Buonaparte
for the Spanish war. Jeffrey is, to be
sure, a man of most uncommon versatility of talent, but what then? There are others as gallant as he.’ |
Think of all this, and let me hear from you very soon on the subject.
Canning is, I have good reason to
know, very anxious about the plan. I mentioned it to Robert Dundas, who was here with his lady for two days on a
pilgrimage to Melrose, and he approved highly of it. Though no literary man, he
is judicious, clair-voyant, and
uncommonly sound-headed, like his father, Lord
Melville. With the exceptions I have mentioned, the thing
continues a secret.
“I am truly happy you think well of the Spanish
business: they have begun in a truly manly and rounded manner, and barring
internal dissension, are, I think, very likely to make their part good.
Buonaparte’s army has come to
assume such a very motley description as gives good hope of its crumbling down
on the frost of adversity setting in. The Germans and Italians have deserted
him in troops, and I greatly doubt his being able to assemble a very huge force
at the foot of the Pyrenees, unless he trusts that the terror of his name will
be sufficient to keep Germany in subjugation, and Austria in awe. The finances
of your old Russian friends
206 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
are said to be ruined out and
out; such is the account we have from Leith.
“Enough of this talk. Ever yours,
Robert Cadell (1788-1849)
Edinburgh bookseller who partnered with Archibald Constable, whose daughter Elizabeth he
married in 1817. After Constable's death and the failure of Ballantyne he joined with Scott
to purchase rights to the
Waverley Novels.
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
Archibald Campbell Colquhoun (1754-1820)
Originally Campbell; he was Lord Advocate (1807) and MP for Elgin (1807-10) and
Dumbartonshire (1810-20); he was a friend of Walter Scott.
Mary Ann Colquhoun [née Erskine] (d. 1833)
The sister of William Erskine (1769-1822) and early friend of Walter Scott; in 1796 she
married the Scottish MP Archibald Campbell (later Colquhoun).
Archibald Constable (1774-1827)
Edinburgh bookseller who published the
Edinburgh Review and works
of Sir Walter Scott; he went bankrupt in 1826.
Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658)
English general and statesman; fought with the parliamentary forces at the battles of
Edgehill (1642) and Marston Moor (1644); led expedition to Ireland (1649) and was named
Lord Protector (1653).
Henry Dundas, first viscount Melville (1742-1811)
Scottish politician, president of the board of control (1793-1801), secretary of war
(1794-1801); first lord of the Admiralty (1804-05).
Charles Rose Ellis, first baron Seaford (1771-1845)
English MP; he was the cousin of George Ellis and friend of George Canning, who had him
created Lord Seaford in 1826. He had been Canning's second in the 1809 duel with
Castlereagh.
George Ellis (1753-1815)
English antiquary and critic, editor of
Specimens of Early English
Poets (1790), friend of Walter Scott.
William Gifford (1756-1826)
Poet, scholar, and editor who began as a shoemaker's apprentice; after Oxford he
published
The Baviad (1794),
The Maeviad
(1795), and
The Satires of Juvenal translated (1802) before becoming
the founding editor of the
Quarterly Review (1809-24).
Reginald Heber, bishop of Calcutta (1783-1826)
English poet and Bishop of Calcutta, author of
Palestine: a Prize
Poem (1807) and the hymn “From Greenland's Icy Mountains.” He was the half-brother
of the book-collector Richard Heber.
Richard Heber (1774-1833)
English book collector, he was the elder half-brother of the poet Reginald Heber and the
friend of Walter Scott: member of the Roxburghe Club and MP for Oxford 1821-1826.
Richard Howe, earl Howe (1726-1799)
He was MP for Dartmouth (1757-82), sailed with Anson, fought in the Seven Years’ War,
created Earl Howe (1788), commander of the Channel Fleet (1790); vice-admiral of England
(1792-96).
William Howe, fifth viscount Howe (1729-1814)
British general in the American War of Independence; after succeeding Gage as
commander-in-chief (1775) he defeated Washington at the Battle of Brandywine and resigned
in 1778.
Francis Jeffrey, Lord Jeffrey (1773-1850)
Scottish barrister, Whig MP, and co-founder and editor of the
Edinburgh
Review (1802-29). As a reviewer he was the implacable foe of the Lake School of
poetry.
Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834)
English political economist educated at Jesus College, Cambridge; he was author of
An Essay on the Principles of Population (1798; 1803).
Thomas James Mathias (1755-1835)
English satirist, the anonymous author of
Pursuits of Literature
(1794-98) and editor of
The Works of Thomas Gray, 2 vols (1814).
From 1817 he lived in Italy, where he translated classic English poets into Italian.
John Murray II (1778-1843)
The second John Murray began the
Quarterly Review in 1809 and
published works by Scott, Byron, Austen, Crabbe, and other literary notables.
Emperor Napoleon I (1769-1821)
Military leader, First Consul (1799), and Emperor of the French (1804), after his
abdication he was exiled to Elba (1814); after his defeat at Waterloo he was exiled to St.
Helena (1815).
William Pitt the younger (1759-1806)
The second son of William Pitt, earl of Chatham (1708-1778); he was Tory prime minister
1783-1801.
George Rose (1744-1818)
British statesman and ally of William Pitt; he was MP for Launceston (1784-88), Lymington
(1788-90), Christchurch (1790-1818), and secretary to the Treasury (1782-83,
1784-1801).
William Stewart Rose (1775-1843)
Second son of George Rose, treasurer of the navy (1744-1818); he introduced Byron to
Frere's
Whistlecraft poems and translated Casti's
Animale parlante (1819).
The Quarterly Review. (1809-1967). Published by John Murray, the
Quarterly was instigated by Walter
Scott as a Tory rival to the
Edinburgh Review. It was edited by
William Gifford to 1824, and by John Gibson Lockhart from 1826 to 1853.